• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

What does this site underrate/overrate?

Furball

Evil Scotsman
The interesting thing is that post World War I, great batsmen from any era will pretty much all have the same batting average and get tons at the same rate. Bradman's obviously an enormous outlier but other than a couple of 30s players who averaged closer to 60 and the recent retirees who average closer to 55 it's been a remarkable constant for 100 years.
 

viriya

International Captain
overrated - sangakarra as a wicketkeeper/batsman. he is matt prior tier when combining both facets.
You realize he gave up the gloves in tests just as his batting got to another level?

Also in ODIs he kept keeping and still had an ATG career.
 

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
As a forum we underrate the effect of prior innings of the match on the game and how it effects current performances.
 

ImpatientLime

International Regular
You realize he gave up the gloves in tests just as his batting got to another level?

Also in ODIs he kept keeping and still had an ATG career.
how does this detract from my point? he sky rocketed but never put the runs on the board as keeper to warrant inclusion in atg xis that i've seen done many times on this board.
 

mr_mister

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
comparing him to prior is just lolworthy

always had a way higher ceiling as a batsman from day dot
 

ImpatientLime

International Regular
yeah that's nice but we're talking about him as a keeper/bat. completely different player.

but sure, keep banging on about his ability purely as a batsman.
 

viriya

International Captain
how does this detract from my point? he sky rocketed but never put the runs on the board as keeper to warrant inclusion in atg xis that i've seen done many times on this board.
It shows that his batting as a keeper in Tests doesn't prove that he was a weak keeper-batsman because he did that in the early stages of his career when he wasn't as good as he became. His ODI record shows that his batting didn't improve because he stopped keeping - he just got better.
 

OverratedSanity

Request Your Custom Title Now!
yeah that's nice but we're talking about him as a keeper/bat. completely different player.

but sure, keep banging on about his ability purely as a batsman.
He started producing more runs primarily because he naturally improved as a batsman, not just because he gave up the gloves.
 

TheJediBrah

Request Your Custom Title Now!
yeah that's nice but we're talking about him as a keeper/bat. completely different player.

but sure, keep banging on about his ability purely as a batsman.
Nah I'm with this guy

Keeping in Tests and keeping on ODIs are very different things, and who knows if he kept keeping he may never have been anywhere near as good as a Test batsman
 

smash84

The Tiger King
Nah I'm with this guy

Keeping in Tests and keeping on ODIs are very different things, and who knows if he kept keeping he may never have been anywhere near as good as a Test batsman
so you didn't see him bat and see his batting evolution?
 

Flem274*

123/5
overrated - weighting the importance of runs in various innings

i hear if you don't score any runs in either of your innings then you probably lose
 

Top